Google Is Turning Off the Works-with-Nest API - <AUTHOR> https://nest.com/whats-happening/ <comment><USER2> > I'm a Works with Nest developer. Will I be able to access and control Nest > devices moving forward?

> No. The Actions on Google Smart Home platform does not provide open API > access to Nest devices, so it cannot be used to access and control Nest > devices. Instead, managing and controlling Google Home, Nest, and thousands > of third-party smart home devices is done through the Google Home app and > the Google Assistant.

Wow, just wow. The entire non-Google Nest ecosystem evaporates overnight.

<comment><USER3> Yup, they just did a Twitter.

I lived through the Twitter ecosystem collapse and now I'm a VC I worry about investing in startups that are built on any large ecosystem where there isn't an alignment of clear economic interest.

Google of all people doing this just made it tougher for everyone else to maintain confidence in large vendor platforms.

<comment><USER4> Here's a note, straight from quotes file, I took around the original Twitter fiasco, and have since reposted or mentioned on HN a few times on occasions similar to this:

* Sovereign from Mass Effect on using someone else's technology:

"Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays, our technology. By using it, your society develops along the paths we desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it." Strangely, it seems to describe recent (2012/2013) situation with API of Twitter perfectly.

\--

Twitter did that _twice_ [0] already, but it's a lesson people have to learn and relearn repeatedly: this is what happens when you build a business entirely around someone else's platform.

\--

[0] - [https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10427530](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10427530)

<comment><USER5> [Spoiler alert, Hyperion series] That sounds totally lifted from the Hyperion series, but maybe the idea is earlier than that, does anyone have a proposed source for that idea that's earlier than 1989?

<comment><USER6> The writers were big Sci-Fi fans. The Asari were heavily influenced by the Minbari of Babylon 5. There are lots of other callouts to classic Sci-Fi in the series.

<comment><USER7> That ending tho. Unforgivable.

<comment><USER8> I will always be mad about the ME3 ending. If reincarnation is something that happens, my reincarnated self will be mad about the ME3 ending from birth.

What a godamn waste.

<comment><USER9> As someone who never played the games but has a rough idea of story and characters, what was wrong with the ending(s)?

<comment><USER10> The endings didn't take into account any of the choices you'd made up until that point. The endings were also a bit brief before the ending patch. I think those were people's biggest complaints, I could be misremembering.

Highly recommend the trilogy! Great story, amazing characters, pretty great gameplay (especially after #1), and overall an immersive journey. I wasn't bothered at all by the ending, personally.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This seems to include all of us using them in open-source "hobbyist" environments, like Home Assistant and Node-Red. I'm quite frustrated by this; I'll never buy another Nest product again, and I now regret my purchase of the Nest Thermostat.

All the rest of my IoT stuff is either open-source hardware/software, or at the least local-only with known protocol interfaces. This was the one exception I made for IoT "cloud", giving Google the benefit of the doubt. I regret deeply giving them that benefit now.

<comment><USER12> The month Google originally bought Nest, I sold my thermostat to someone else and picked up an Insteon thermostat instead. My Insteon thermostat's been a reliable partner since, and doesn't send my data to anyone. I actually turned a profit on it, since I got rebate credit from my electric company originally for buying it.

<comment><USER13> My gripe is the design is nowhere near as good. It's like going from an iPhone to a feature phone.

I wish there were an open-source Nest firmware, or at least an open-source backend. Google doesn't need to know when I'm home.

<comment><USER14> Nest is actually _far_ from great thermostate, definitely not "iPhone" of thermostate. It doesn't allow lots of manual settings and it doesn't handle anything more than simple systems well. There is lot of marketing that is blinding but not much substance. You should check out thermostats like Ecobee instead.

<comment><USER15> Specifics? It does everything a basic programmable thermostat does in a simpler interface.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER16> EU law (because the EU seems to be the only one willing to make these big laws inconveniencing tech) - any IOT enabled product that has the IOT capabilities removed by closing of a service without a simple way for those capabilities to be re-enabled (simple being further clarified in law) can be returned for a full purchase refund up to 3 months after closing of the service.

<comment><USER17> IIRC there is a law where you can return items for a full refund or exchange if the product was "not fit for purpose", which includes shenanigans like these.

<comment><USER18> There is a law you can return anything brought online without giving any reason for 14 days, I don't think there is a law which applies here?

<comment><USER19> At least in the UK there are the concepts of "fit for purpose" (and of merchantable quality) and "reasonable expected life". Now I doubt there's yet been much chance to evolve what a reasonable life of a smart thermostat or associated devices are, but crucially liability is with the retailer. It's on them to prove they are not liable. If they then want to chase the manufacturer, that's separate. It probably pays not to buy direct from manufacturer.

A retailer can be busy ducking all their legal obligations and telling you that you're long past the window of refund, but mention the provisions of the Sale of Goods Act and you usually get a very different response, or a manager is called over (to authorise the inevitable refund). The Sale of Goods Act is still law (Well, parts of it), and the newer EU Consumer Rights Act is in force as well. Good job too, the Sale of Goods Act is stronger in several areas, whilst the EU gave us 2 year warranty.

There is case law where things have been judged to be within reasonable expected life, and a repair, refund or compensation ordered long after the mandatory warranty ran out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> For those who see this as Google turning off an unused service: no, just no. This is Google cutting off a massive interop ecosystem to try to parlay the success of Nest into higher adoption of Google Home. That's vastly different than shutting down G+, Wave, Orkut, Reader, etc.

It would be as if they announced tomorrow that the only way to read GMail is in Chrome browser or on an Android phone.

<comment><USER21> > For those who see this as Google turning off an unused service: no, just no. > This is Google cutting off a massive interop ecosystem to try to parlay the > success of Nest into higher adoption of Google Home. That's vastly different > than shutting down G+, Wave, Orkut, Reader, etc.

It's exactly the same as previous shutdowns, it's just that you didn't personally care about previous shutdowns and couldn't be arsed to emphasise or learn the lesson that google can not be trusted to keep services alive.

The sharp folks are those like ocdtrekkie upthread who shed their nest immediately upon learning of the acquisition.

<comment><USER22> Since you claim its exactly the same as previous shutdowns listed; when Google shut down Wave, which paid for Google product were they aiming to increase adoption of?

<comment><USER23> my memory of wave is that it barely even launched. wasn't it around less than a year? did anyone actually use it?

<comment><USER24> My group of friends tried to. It could have been quite successful, since it basically offered what Discord is now.

<comment><USER25> How? I guess you could use it like a chat room just putting new messages at the bottom of the document but seems like a crazy kludge to use Wave as a chat.

<comment><USER24> I thought that was its intended primary purpose. We could chat and inline media, pictures, etc. It was a big upgrade from IRC. There were issues with sharing files larger than just images and whatnot, but it easily could have been polished a bit into something better. If Discord added the ability to have 'threads', it would basically be what we used Wave for. For a few weeks anyway until Google decided it wasn't catching on enough or whatever justification they gave for giving up on it.

<comment><USER25> I don't think I ever heard of it being pitched that way just as a collaborative editing room for editing an actual document not just for using the comments etc as a chat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I used to be a fan of Google. They were the good ones, the open ones. Ha! I've feel like they played the long sucker game. How times have changed. Even Android feels like a ruse. And Chrome. And maps.

The last thing will be search. At some point it'll be curated for my own good.

To be fair, Everyone has to make a living, but be honest don't take people for suckers of make them into suckers.

<comment><USER27> I agree. I used to be a fan. They were explicitly not evil, gave lots of open source stuff away for free, made lots of other free services.

Turns out they were just making us dependent on them, and now that they've got us, they do whatever they want. We need to make ourselves less dependent on Google. Move away from GMail, use Firefox, DuckDuckGo, OSM, federated social networks, etc. I don't have a good replacement for Android yet, as iOS is just another walled garden. Similarly, Facebook is no replacement for Google+. We need stuff to be opener, not dependent on another company. For email, you need to own your own domain, so you can easily move from one provider to another.

<comment><USER28> god I tried. DuckDuckGo just does not work as well as it needs to. It gets touted as a turn key google search replacement but it's simply not. 4 times today, I searched 5+ different ways for something after poor results, each thing took one search to find on google. Granted, maybe I am just more familiar with how to get the most out of googles search, maybe it has such a vast profile on me that it understands what I want i am looking for. Either way, i am pretty close to caving and it's sad

<comment><USER29> You can use the !SP operator before your DDG search to invoke StartPage, which uses Google results. I mean, it's the same thing, just it doesn't look like you're using Google search ;)

<comment><USER30> Even better, with same results: use !s as a token anywhere in your search string :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> What's the point of creating an ecosystem if you won't support it? Typical Google. I understand shutting down or refocusing services that don't work. But decisions like this or to shut down Inbox make no sense to me. It feels like complete disregard of the user base.

<comment><USER32> Google has done this again and again with their APIs and services other than their main search and advertising business. For me as a developer Google has a bad name now and I'd never invest my time developing something in their ecosystem or worse have my business depend on it. They do not care about their user base as is shown even when they shut down paid services. Which is why even with all their promises about Google Cloud I still don't trust it. When one says that about Google Cloud you get this immune response that it is different, but it is prefixed with Google which is a bad name when it comes to keeping third party services or APIs up paid or unpaid.

<comment><USER33> I've been a Google apologist for most of my HN career, but shutting down Inbox really changed my view. Regular old GMail sucks compared to Inbox, especially the mobile app. I miss the Inbox app and its layout and recognition of important emails so much that I don't feel like I can get attached to anything else they make.

<comment><USER34> I'd long been thinking about it, but this shutdown is what triggered me completely moving away from Google.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> So now all Nest accounts have to go through Google. Can't wait for the first time some Android developer gets their Google account locked and suddenly can't change the temperature on their HVAC unit.

<comment><USER36> Or that people using Gsuite wont be able to perform certain actions because ... reasons? My Google home hub is still pretty useless since they don't allow some features.

</comment></comment><comment><USER37> So my Nest app[1] that has 1800+ registered users will stop working in August. :'(

[1] [https://richev.me/nest](https://richev.me/nest)

<comment><USER38> Look not to be blunt, but 1800 users? Why should they care?

I'm being a devils advocate, but ... if you were at Google and a person making large business decisions, why would you care about 1800 users?

<comment><USER39> Because having an open API fosters a community of applications that is free marketing and free development for your product.

Nest products are expensive, those 1800 users may equate to a few hundred thousand in revenue for Google, who may instead buy a competitor for their next purchase.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER40> Wait, so people that bought other devices that "Works with Nest" will no longer work with Nest?

<comment><USER41> Correct:

[https://nest.com/whats-happening/#im-a-works-with-nest- devel...](https://nest.com/whats-happening/#im-a-works-with-nest-developer- will-my-solution-still-be-able-to-access-and-control-nest-devices)

<comment><USER40> Another reminder to never buy a "smart" device. At the end of the day they are pretty dumb.

<comment><USER42> I have Wemo smart plugs that I have plugged in all sorts of stuff like Heater, Lamps, and TV, etc connected to my Google Home and Home Mini. And I'd advise anyone to think twice before buying smart plugs or smart devices. There are so many bugs creating so many complications that I feel they are not worth using. You'd need to reconnect them with WEMO app time and again, restart these frequently if they just stop working and even you would not know what to do with them when a failed firmware upgrade will make your smart plug useless!

<comment><USER43> > And I'd advise anyone to think twice before buying smart plugs or smart > devices.

Not all smart devices are created alike. Research your purchases.

So far the one I've been most happy with is IKEA Trådfri.

It costs roughly half of the comparable Phillips hue offering, but still delivers on any aspect I care about.

Works 100% locally, uses standard Zigbee (non-WiFi) networking. No cloud required.

Supports HomeKit, Alexa, google assistant, not to mention Home Assistant.

More importantly, it supports other vendor's Zigbee devices (like Hue) and supports working with other Zigbee controllers than IKEA's own.

Also certified non-shit by kernel-hacker Matthew Garret[1].

Nobody can shut me out of this purchase. This _is_ actually my hardware.

[1] [https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/47803.html](https://mjg59.dreamwidth.org/47803.html)

<comment><USER44> I have also voted with my money for IKEA Trådfri and am quite happy with it. Light bulbs, motion sensors, remote controls. Everything connected to zigbee coordinator and controlled with simple node red flows. And good thing is that list of supported devices is longer than any other single vendor with option to expand it by your self.

Baby starts moving in bedroom, light bulb flashes in kitchen.

Sonos stopped supporting remote control, no problem, map IKEA remote controller to start/stop Sonos playback.

[https://nodered.org](https://nodered.org)

[https://www.zigbee2mqtt.io](https://www.zigbee2mqtt.io)

[https://www.zigbee2mqtt.io/information/supported_devices.htm...](https://www.zigbee2mqtt.io/information/supported_devices.html)

[https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/products/lighting/smart- lighting/](https://www.ikea.com/gb/en/products/lighting/smart-lighting/)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Very confusing headline should be:

Google Is Turning Off the "Works with Nest" API

<comment> marquis-chacha It's a "garden path sentence", but not in the fun way.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden- path_sentence](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garden-path_sentence)

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> I see Google API/ecosystem fans often defending or dismissing Google's pattern of behavior here, using arguments like this:

 _"Well, sure, they shut down that API I don't use — big deal; all things come to an end eventually! But, they'd NEVER do that to this API I rely on — that would be so horrible, Google just would not do it!"_

I hope we all can acknowledge that this argument is on perpetually eroding ground, at the very least.

<comment><USER47> I've been considering pasting this: [https://killedbygoogle.com/](https://killedbygoogle.com/) every time the argument comes up. Maybe Google proponents will make one for other companies notorious for killing services, but at least for now, the Google Graveyard grows.

<comment><USER48> I don't quite get what people expect... do they think that once google creates something, they are obligated to continue it indefinitely? That seems like an unreasonable expectation.

<comment><USER49> We expect web services to go away eventually. We expect physical products to keep working until they physically break. The problem is when companies sell physical products with a web service as a fundamental part of the product. Companies want to treat the web service like any other web service, while their customers reasonably expect their physical product to act like any other physical product.

Edit: I want to add that this is a really easy problem to solve. Support or create an open standard for the communication between the device and the server. Allow the device to be reconfigured to communicate with other servers. Then you can shut down your service and owners can keep on going. Better yet, make it so that our device can communicate on the LAN without needing a server at all. These problems exist not because they're some inevitable fact of life, but because these companies see more value in not fixing them.

<comment><USER50> Are the physical devices not working after this change, or rather some of the applications developed for these devices need to switch to another API?

<comment><USER51> There is no other API to switch to, as Google controls the protocol, no open standard exists to replicate the Nest API server, and Nest devices don't support targeting a self hosted API.

If you as a user or third party provider integrated with this API and rely on it for functionality, you have no alternative nor recourse.

<comment><USER50> Isn't "Works with Google Assistant" supposed to become the replacement API? It seems like they don't offer direct access to the data or the device but plan to allow "some" level of control? (I don't know the space, apologize if my questions are naive...)

> As a Works with Nest developer and partner, you will not be able to access > or control Nest devices once the Works with Nest APIs are turned off on > August 31, 2019. Moving forward, our team will focus on making Works with > Google Assistant the most helpful and intelligent ecosystem for the home, > enabling all of the products in your users' homes to work together. We > encourage all smart home developers to visit the Actions on Google Smart > Home developer site to learn how to integrate your devices or services with > the Google Assistant.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> Honestly, I think that IoT manufacturers should be required to provide open APIs. Preventing third-party developers from interfacing with smart devices, especially after they've already been sold to consumers, seems dangerously monopolistic.

<comment><USER52> To be clear: I want a _legal_ requirement. Like any industry that has vastly expanded in power and societal influence, the tech industry may ultimately need to be regulated for the greater good.

</comment></comment><comment><USER53> > One developer platform. We want to unify our efforts around third-party > connected home devices under a single developer platform – a one-stop shop > for both our developers and our customers to build a more helpful home. To > accomplish this, we'll be winding down Works with Nest on August 31, 2019, > and delivering a single unified experience through the Works with Google > Assistant program.

> One set of privacy commitments. As Nest redefines technology in the home, > there's an opportunity to explain clearly and simply how our connected home > devices and services work, and how we will respect your privacy. Learn more > about Google's commitment to privacy in the home.

and at least a preliminary perusal of the google home apps seems to indicate control of nest works:

[https://assistant.google.com/explore/c/19/?jsmode=du&hl=en_U...](https://assistant.google.com/explore/c/19/?jsmode=du&hl=en_US&utm_campaign=GS102472&utm_source=external&utm_medium=email_service&utm_content=workswithgoogleassistant)

so while grumpiness about this consolidation and need to migrate / have a google account (instead of nest account) seems warranted, this doesn't feel like the same thing as "pulling a twitter" or a conspiracy to bait and switch developers.

if it turns out you won't be able to actually control the nest in the same way, I'll go get my pitchfork and join y'all, but I'm cautiously waiting to see how this turns out.

<comment><USER54> Read upthread, but lots of control appears to be lost - some estimated 90% of programatic control. Grab your pitchfork :)

</comment></comment><comment><USER55> Man, Google is the new Microsoft of the 90s. Fuck them. I have 3 Nest thermostats (bought prior to the Nest acquisition.)

<comment><USER56> No. There is a lot of reasons to criticize Microsoft but they keep their services/apis alive longer than any other company.

<comment><USER14> Correct. If you had bought Windows Phone, it still works today. It's unbelievable that they have kept the whole thing running for may be 10,000 people out there.

<comment><USER57> Unfortunately not anymore. You cannot reset your device or add new apps if it is not supporting w10 mobile anymore.

Hopefully most wp8 devices can be upgraded but I would not depend on that for long...

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER58> I bought two Nest thermostats this winter because they worked with only R-W wires. I turned off the learning feature, as it was useless for my house with its combination of passive solar and radiant heat. However, the API is/was quite simple and I was looking forward to writing my own controller.

Still, I had this nagging feeling that I shouldn't have bought them. Thanks for confirming my anxieties, Google! I can't trust you, but I at least can trust you to be you.

<comment><USER59> > I bought two Nest thermostats this winter because they worked with only R-W > wires.

FWIW, I've got a gas fireplace with no C wire that I added a 120V->24V AC adapter and a Fast-STAT common maker to for <$100 to wire my Ecobee thermostat without needing to alter any in-wall wiring.

</comment></comment><comment><USER60> So let's talk alternatives. EcoBee? Honeywell?

What's the suggested alternate device and route for those of us that like a little control, like having other services that can integrate, and don't want to be yanked around by shutdowns?

<comment><USER61> EcoBee is what I bought when the writing was on the wall with Nest. Works with HomeKit, so EcoBee could go under tomorrow and Apple stuff can still talk to it. Or if an open solution is more to your liking, works with Home Assistant, too, though it goes through the API to work.

</comment></comment><comment><USER62> How soon until google gets sued for the bait and switch? This reminds me of the Sony PlayStation Linux lawsuit: [https://segmentnext.com/2016/06/21/sony- linux-lawsuit-ends-s...](https://segmentnext.com/2016/06/21/sony-linux- lawsuit-ends-sony-will-pay-millions-gamers/)

<comment><USER63> Realistically is there any lawsuit that can make any dent in Google's profits?

<comment><USER64> While they are not civil lawsuits, EU's anti-competition fines certainly can make a dent in any company's profits since they are based on a percentage of global turnover.

<comment><USER65> Same with GDPR fines

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> Anyone know if Alexa is their biggest Nest API client?

That's one way to shut out Amazon.

<comment><USER20> Yeah, that is the most likely explanation. Everyone else is just collateral damage.

</comment></comment><comment><USER67> Hey, so how do I graph the temperature of my house at each temperature sensor over time?

I knew how to do that with the Nest API (see e.g. [https://github.com/peterot/nest-graph](https://github.com/peterot/nest-graph) or [https://github.com/nbrownus/nestflux](https://github.com/nbrownus/nestflux) ). These data provide some useful information about energy expenditure in the house, a little better than the Nest "schedule" view of daily heating/cooling activity and daily temperature settings.

Will this still be possible with the new indirect Google Assistant API integration they are describing? How?

<comment><USER38> Lots of little tiny cheap ESP8266 based systems with DS18S20 temp sensors all over your house, telling you far more than just a single Nest thermostat could tell you.

Look into low power sleep modes, so that it can run for a very long time, waking up at some interval to take a quick temperature measurement, report it, then go back to sleep. While you're at it, have it confirm its battery level and report that too if the battery is low.

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> Does any attorney want to speculate whether Google could be forced to accept returns on Nest devices now that they're materially worse through intentional actions?

<comment><USER69> They could, but then they would delete your Gmail and permanently ban you from their services, probably.

<comment><USER68> Retaliation seems unwise as well

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER70> IFTTT sent out an email about an hour ago warning of the pending shutdown of their integration.

</comment><comment><USER71> If you build a business around a Google CONSUMER device/service/api/whatever at this stage you are a fool.

</comment><comment><USER72> It's interesting to see the responses to this article and contrast with the responses to the article regarding Facebook's possible 5B fine. I don't know the motivation behind this decision but I can't help but see the two sides of the same coin.

If we decide as a society that third-party apps misusing the platform in a way that hurts the users or otherwise looks bad to the outside world is the platform's fault, even if this was done with the user's consent (which the app that harvested data for Cambridge Analytica had) and furthermore decide that such conduct deserves a disproportionate fine (which 5B is, given that much larger breaches without any consent have generally gone unpunished) because the platform as a whole is owned by a large successful company, we cannot also expect large tech companies to keep supporting open platforms that allow third-parties to thrive. The economic benefits of giving control to the user are fairly marginal and theoretical, while the risks are extremely large and potentially existential.

I'm not intimately familiar with this particular API, but it's almost certain that it can be abused by third party apps in a way that makes look Google bad. Platform openness has its advocates and detractors at every company. In light of what's going on, it would be hard for the advocates to win any argument.

<comment><USER73> _which the app that harvested data for Cambridge Analytica had_

This is just part of the picture and almost revisionist in its briefness.

Sure, they had "permission" from the user, which took that "personality-test" to harvest their data.

Who sure as shit did not agree to have their data harvested were the friends of those who took the test and whoms data was harvested and resold with applomb and abandon.

Leaving this part out of your statement makes this statement a lie by omission.

<comment><USER74> The thing is, that's clearly not what most people actually object to about Cambridge Analytica. I mean, the same is even more true of Obama's 2012 campaign, which went so far as to harvest their supporters' friends' posting activity to assess how best to get those friends to vote Obama, and yet nearly all of the people who loudly decried Cambridge Analytica used this same bogus consent argument to justify why the Obama campaign's actions were OK.

<comment><USER73> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER75> If a developer has gone to the effort to integrate their solution with Nest, I'd be very surprised if they don't get their solution integrated with Google Assistant, and Apple HomeKit too while they're at it. So I assume that when end-users switch over their Nest devices to the Google Assistant platform, their existing Nest integrations will be available on the Google Assistant platform too. Doesn't appear to be as doom and gloom as most other commenters here are predicting.

<comment><USER76> I believe the kind of Google Assistant integration you would need to replicate this kind of access is impossible in publicly available APIs currently.

Google has much more integration capabilities, but they seem to be this far "invite only", you can't request it.

<comment><USER77> So... The functionality exists and is currently in testing, it's only just become stable enough that we're hearing about it, and they're notifying developers targeting the current service as far ahead of time as possible? I mean, it won't do anything for stuff that's too crappy to take software updates, but that's an entirely different matter.

Edit: Finally went and read the announcement. They're really not giving people much time, are they? Nevermind, three months is pretty bad.

<comment><USER78> No, this isn't a case of moving functionality from Nest to Google. They've _removed_ the Nest API ("set the temperature", "set to away", "what's the temperature?"). They say "move to Google Assistant" but Google Assistant doesn't let you do that.

Also - I could sort of understand it if they provided a proper IFTTT style system in Google Home but they don't. All you can do is trigger actions based on a custom voice command or a time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> If you're even slightly surprised by this you weren't paying attention when Google bought the Revolv smart home ecosystem then took it out back and shot it. All the customers got when their expensive smart home devices shut down was a "Thanks for playing, here's a coupon for saving when you buy a Nest because we just turned off all your shit".

Google is a company with severe ADHD. Consumers expect home appliances to operate for decades. That is not a good mixture. If the whole "internet of things" trend dies out and people stop buying, you bet your ass Google will happily shut Nest's servers down and leave every single one of their customers out in the cold. They've already done it.

I've got friends with home automation systems from the early 80s. They work flawlessly. You think any service or device Google sells will be functioning in twenty years? Thirty?

Call me when IBM is offering a smart hub.

<comment><USER80> When Lowes shut down their IRIS system, they actually sent out checks refunding every cent all of their customers had paid out into their hardware.

I was completely shocked

I haven't found a replacement for them yet, but I'm incredibly wary of investing into _any_ ecosystem these days.

<comment><USER79> I'll trust a smart outlet to cut my AC on for me. I'll even trust a wi-fi security camera aimed at my front yard. However, my corpse will be in the cold, cold ground before I hook a door or an oven up to the internet.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER81> Hey, at least they are going to roll "Nest" accounts into "Google" accounts so hopefully the app can stop asking me to set up sms based 2fa everytime I try to change the temp.

All that employee stock from the acquisition must be finished vesting.

<comment><USER82> Yeah, I welcome this change. Nest's account management is garbage. It alerts me when a smoke alarm fires, but then it asks me to login, as if I have any idea what the password is.

</comment></comment><comment><USER83> Nest screwed the pooch with me before Google bought them by changing their UI and temporarily bricking my thermostat with unwanted firmware updates. (My Nest still works as a dumb thermostat but I'll never let it talk to the Internet again.)

When Google bought them I knew Nest would only get worse, and here we are.

</comment><comment><USER84> Can't wait for them to tell me that Google Apps accounts aren't supported so I'll lose all access to my Nest devices... if that happens I'll be removing all of my Nest devices and selling my Google Home.

I'm _SO SICK_ of them acting like there needs to be a firewall between google apps accounts and _everything else_.

<comment><USER85> Well, Google Apps accounts are for businesses, so it makes sense that they wouldn't work like a personal account.

<comment><USER86> Well, it was firstly advertised as free account with custom domain. I was one of many who created the account. and keep frustrating and maintaining another @gmail.com account for this reason.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER87> Literally bought a nest thermostat yesterday. Glad it's still in the box. Wondering what the best alternative is now.

<comment><USER88> Hadn't set mine up yet, but I did take it out of the box. Time to pack it back up and return it.

<comment><USER89> Defective by design.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> Just to be clear: is this confirmed to mean that Alexa will no longer integrate with Nest?

</comment><comment><USER90> I guess all my nest stuff is going ebay... Too bad.

<comment><USER91> Sell to the greater fool?

<comment><USER90> I'm going to try!

<comment><USER91> On a serious note I hope someone can buy it and hack it to work with some API, otherwise it's more landfill.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER92> Another entry for [https://killedbygoogle.com/](https://killedbygoogle.com/)

</comment><comment><USER93> Looking forward to when google turns off their corporate headquarters.

</comment><comment><USER38> If you're looking for a replacement, try starting here...

[https://www.hackster.io/projects/tags/thermostat](https://www.hackster.io/projects/tags/thermostat)

Plenty of people have worked on open source / open hardware thermostat systems. Take your anger at this and apply it to them.

<comment><USER94> ecobee

</comment></comment><comment><USER95> Can I return my Nest for a refund? This is so stupid.

<comment><USER96> I contacted one of their support guys, eventually I was put through to a senior agent. After I quoted a bunch of consumer laws (at least here in the UK) he was adamant that their terms of services lets them change features as they wish so legal action is definitely going to be the only way forward.

From the follow up email: "Any product feature can be changed at Nests discretion under the terms terms of service. It is for this reason that I cannot refund the cost of your thermostat."

</comment></comment><comment><USER97> Just yesterday I started to look into building a tiny app that checks if the temperature in my two rooms that have a Nest is too hot or cold in one and OK in the other and just turn the fan on instead of heat/AC. And here we go...I guess I am not making that dumb "smart thermostat" ant smarter.

</comment><comment><USER67> Does the Nest thermostat product still have an active firmware / hardware / software team?

It feels like various features have been kind of frozen in place for the past few years.

</comment><comment><USER98> This is why we need to be pushing for devices that use open protocols at the very least. (Ideally they'd be fully open devices.)

It saddens me to see people buy into IoT and not think about the vendor lock- in or data exfiltration. The thing is, there really aren't any alternatives.

<comment><USER99> At the very _least,_ the fact that the upcoming Nest Hub Max supports Thread is a (small) step in the right direction.

<comment><USER98> What is thread? That's a very unsearchable term.

<comment><USER44> Protocol invented by google :)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_(network_protocol)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thread_\(network_protocol\))

<comment><USER99> But crucially, has support from Samsung, ARM holdings, Qualcomm and, now, even Apple.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER100> This makes it seem like you would have to use the "Works with Google Assistant" API's instead? i.e. rather than completely not available, there's a new platform?

Don't know about either API to know if that's the case, but it's what the page implies?

<comment><USER101> It's a significantly smaller subset of APIs leaving you with far less control.

</comment></comment><comment><USER102> Honestly, this is so Google. They consistently abandon products and leave their customers hanging. I'll never buy another product from them.

This is a huge win for Amazon. Ring will get more customers and Nest will be abandoned.

</comment><comment><USER103> headline should be "that $300 doorbell is now a paperweight".

in the future it will be "that $8000 trunk car driving computer is now a paperweight".

<comment><USER38> Pretty much straight up FUD. This is not bricking Nest devices.

<comment><USER34> Ok, more like "That remotely controlled car with integrated taxi service you bought?"

Well, now it's "Just a car"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER104> Google decides to unify APIs under a single IoT brand, thus shutting down redundant APIs. Google bad.

Google maintaining multiple APIs that essentially do the same thing. Google bad.

People are going to complain either way. I welcome this change personally and think it makes perfect business sense. I can't think of any Works with Nest that I have integrated in my home that's not already connected to my Google Home, so I don't really see this impacting many negatively.

<comment><USER105> Given the comments in this post, I think people disagree with you.

Not sure how you came to the conclusion that because you can't think of any integrations you personally use that it won't affect others.

</comment></comment><comment><USER106> Some years later: Google shuts down Nest.

</comment><comment><USER107> Anyone want to buy a nest? It came with the home and I'd rather use it as a hockey puck than a thermostat/spy.

<comment><USER108> That's quite the sales pitch.

</comment></comment><comment><USER109> While I'm frustrated at this, I'm wondering if what I'm feeling is a knee-jerk reaction.

I wonder how the Actions on Google Smart Homes integration works.

Will I still be able to control my Nest thermostats from Google Smart Home Actions? This seems to be mentioned, but it's unclear what I'm able to do and how.

</comment><comment><USER110> I wonder how big the "Works-with-Nest" ecosystem actually is. With that I don't mean the _potential_ size, but the actual size in terms of usage.

Does anyone have a bit of insight in that? Maybe that could give more insight in the reasoning of Google to shut it down.

</comment><comment><USER111> Yet another reason why we need protocols and not APIs.

</comment><comment><USER112> It seems weird they're announcing this during I/O - you'd think they'd avoid telling developers that their platforms sometimes shut down with 3 months notice and with no replacement provided when everyone's paying attention.

</comment><comment><USER113> I went through the elaborate motions of setting up HomeBridge to make my pre- HomeKit Nest ecosystem inter operate with my Apple devices. Now they've gone and trashed it. I guess I'll just replace all their devices and Google can go to hell.

</comment><comment><USER114> So the only huge company not royally screwing over their dev ecosystem is MS?

</comment><comment><USER115> I read on The Verge that the Nest cameras will have their operating lights hardcoded to ON.

They cite pervy privacy reasons, but bad luck for anyone using it as a baby monitor, through a glass window, etc.

</comment><comment><USER116> The worst part is that Google Home is a complete shit-show so far. I constantly have to redo device setups for dvices that randomly disappear, recreate groups that lose one or more (and sometimes _all_ ) devices, and physically reset devices that randomly disconnect from wifi. It's been a terrible experience so far. I'd get rid of it completely if Alexa would let me like songs on Spotify, but that's another conversation altogether.

</comment><comment><USER117> I am turning off my future purchases of Google Nest products.

<comment><USER38> Why exactly? How does this decision impact you personally?

<comment><USER118> You keep repeating this in your comments like a broken record. What do _you_ care that people care? People obviously do care or they wouldn't be voicing on HN? Why does that bother you so much?

<comment><USER38> Because I believe many of the responses are irrational, and not expressing what the actual underlying feelings are of the commenters.

People are upset that there is a reduction in the openness of things, which I understand. People are upset that their personal projects and home hacks will stop working, which I understand.

They should just state that though, and not the "That's it I'm never buying Nest again" type of angry response.

If you want to hack your home, there are many open source alternatives.

<comment><USER119> If you're dumping 2-3 hundred dollars on a thermostat, and suddenly it starts losing functionality, not buying another one makes a bit of sense.

Or, relatedly, do you think all those labs that bought PS3's for their ability to act as Linux clusters were wrong to sue the hell out of Sony?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER120> I understand everyone wants to dump on Google here, but Nest labs is the company that made the API, not Google, and AFAIK they never turned a profit. So as far as "promises" go, Google didn't really make a promise to anyone w.r.t the API FWICT. Google has shuttered their own products plenty, but when you purchase a loss-making company you're going to want to streamline everything, so you can make your money back.

</comment><comment><USER121> I wonder if it's time to re-evaluate the concept of "not invented here". Services that exist at another company's pleasure aren't a platform to build a business on. This is effectively a type a single sourcing. There are no contractual obligations to you on the part of the service provider, and tremendous leverage to undermine you if you ever get big enough to get noticed.

</comment><comment><USER38> How many things use that API?

<comment><USER122> I do. I have a command line nest app that I use to control my temperature.

<comment><USER38> So a personal project then, not a commercial one. My guess is they just lost a new customer with you.

The root of my question though is this: Is most API use a hobby thing, or a professional thing businesses are build around?

My assumption here is that the financial impact is trivial for them. They aren't Valve ending Half-Life modding for example. If that's not a clear analogy, Valve's enabling of modding for Half-Life enabled Counter Strike, which basically kept Valve alive so they could become what they are now.

<comment><USER123> Nest's income/expense is likely a rounding error on the Google balance sheet. Killing off the Nest developer ecosystem is a choice, not driven by any economics.

I have eight Nest thermostats across two homes, and a pile of Nest cameras. My "hobbyist" use of the APIs collects and aggregates some of the data together since the Nest UI (web or mobile) is lousy at best. Given that Google Home / Google Assistant do not work* with my G Suite account, I'm not at all confident about continuing to use Nest equipment after the grand changeover to Google Home Assistant Whatever in August.

* By "do not work" I mean: You log in to a Google Home device with a G Suite account and it (the device) cannot be shared with any other accounts, and it cannot access any of your data like your calendar. Oddly Alexa has no difficulties accessing my G Suite calendar.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER124> So "Works with Nest" is the G version of "Plays For Sure"?

Funny how the more assertive the name the more likely it is to be dumped

</comment><comment><USER125> I thought about buying a thermostat for my district heating radiators. But for the time being I just manage with a cheap thermometer and regulating the radiator manually, because they already have a crude thermostat. It works quite good, because weather is not changing as fast day to day and heating season is not very long.

Many times more technology equals more nuisance.

</comment><comment><USER126> Will the Nest Alexa skill still continue to work?

<comment><USER78> I don't see how it could.

Edit: actually the Nest skill seems to be provided by Nest, not Amazon. So as long as they don't remove it it should keep working.

</comment></comment><comment><USER127> It really feels like Google is starting to be forced to actually make money on things or get rid of them. With Nest that means sell more of their products and ecosystem instead of supporting everybody else...given last quarter's numbers etc. it looks like they may need to begin to focus on that, especially if the ad revenues continue to go down.

</comment><comment><USER128> Just bought a home this year and I am so glad I went with Ecobee and Ubiquiti Unifi cameras.

If your model is a subscription service I don't want your product. Especially if they are acquired by Google. Google has acquired and killed (or killed their own products) more products than almost any company I use.

I don't even want Alexa so I just turn it off.

</comment><comment><USER129> How can I return all my Nest products in the United States? Any EU-like laws apply here?

</comment><comment><USER130> Welcome to the "cloud" world! Google is pretty "windy" these days.

<comment><USER131> ThanosWare

At a click of a finger, half the features disappear!

</comment></comment><comment><USER132> And there went my love for Nest. I've been one of the earliest adopters...love the product. After they got acquired by Google I've been expecting this, however, not so soon.

Time to start looking into an alternative - suggestions anyone?

</comment><comment><USER133> I was just about to upgrade my home with Nest products. The other alternative I was looking into looks much more attractive now.

I wonder if this was about money, control, or developer resources? What's the upshot for them?

</comment><comment><USER134> This sort of thing by Google (along with dropping many beloved consumer products) has become such a regular occurrence that I wonder how much it has impacted the tepid adoption of Google Cloud by developers.

</comment><comment><USER135> It will be interesting to see if some open source firmware comes out of this. I wonder if we will see people "jailbreaking" their IoT devices to work with more open/collaborative marketplaces.

</comment><comment><USER136> :clap: :clap: Don't make breaking changes in public things :clap: :clap:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyLBGkS5ICk](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyLBGkS5ICk)

</comment><comment><USER137> I don't want to work at a place where my projects will get shut down.

</comment><comment><USER138> Does anyone know of a good replacement for the Nest Protect Smoke Alarms? Lots of recs for ecobee and insteon for thermostats, but I'd love a smoke detector recommendation.

</comment><comment><USER139> Google doesn't care about individual people.

Scale is fun! >.>

</comment><comment><USER140> Does this mean Alexa won't be able to control my thermostat anymore? What a crappy way to get me to switch to their ecosystem.

</comment><comment><USER141> Anyone know a good replacement for a nest cam?

<comment><USER142> Ubiquiti is great. They make cloud integration easy if you want it, or self hosted as well.

<comment><USER101> I have thousands of dollars of Ubiquiti gear in my house, but I opted for Ring cameras instead.

Primarily because, even though I have plenty of storage space for an NVR, I don't want to rely on thieves not stealing the thing if they break in, thus leaving me with no footage. It would be easy enough to constantly back the data up to a different location, I suppose, but not something I wanted to bother with.

They also integrate pretty well with the Ring alarm system, and the $10/mo I pay for monitoring alarm service for burglary and smoke/co2 detectors I have also covers the storage cost for multiple cameras, etc.

I just picked up a smart lock that will supposedly get additional integration later this year, and be able to disarm the alarm system automatically when it's unlocked. (This functionality already exists for some other smart lock options)

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER143> Reminds me of when nest 'bricked' revolv devices and migrated the users to nest.

I am sticking with a non-IOT thermostat.

</comment><comment><USER144> Disclaimer: I own no Smart Home devices.

Under the FAQ, I was not able to find an entry like "Will I be able to reach a human about my Nest devices / services?". That's a bit scary. Not sure if that was possible before though. But, considering the occasional horror story of what happens when you get locked out of a Google account, I wonder what the impact will be having a Nest integrated with that.

</comment><comment><USER145> Are there any Open Source hard/software based home-assistant alternatives to stuff like Nest and Alexa?

</comment><comment><USER146> Okay. What should I replace my Nest thermostat and camera with? Recommendations appreciated.

</comment><comment><USER147> As someone who uses Home Assistant to keep some level of control over my data, this sucks.

</comment><comment><USER148> Good. One less reason to use this type of garbage in your house anyways.

</comment><comment><USER149> And this is why Google will never be able to sell to the enterprise.

<comment><USER150> This is why Google will not be able to sell things not backed by an SLA and a contract to the enterprise.

Guess what, GSuite and GC are covered by SLAs/contracts.

But yes, this is a stupid move by Google, trying to lock out other controllers/apps. I have been looking at home automation and I want: a) open APIs b) security c) functionality

Most offers/products don't even do c) very well.

<comment><USER63> They did increase Google Map Apis prices a lot almost overnight though.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER151> "Alexa, tell Google to turn up the heat"

</comment><comment><USER152> So what you're saying is Google is giving another red flag that any work done with them should only be considered a privilege that can be revoked at any time? It's funny I found this article and I'd literally just been thinking about how I need to avoid Google products because I can't afford to have my workflow just up and disappear when someone at Google gets promoted to a higher level management.

</comment><comment><USER153> Questions I won't get answers to, but about which I'm curious anyway:

1\. How many _end-users_ are affected?

2\. How many _devs_ are affected?

3\. What is the annual _transaction volume_ that is affected?

Depending on the magnitude of the answers to these questions, I can see turning this API off being either a good thing or a bad thing. If hundreds of users are affected, well. Sad, but sometimes unpopular things get turned off. If hundreds of thousands of users are affected, this is an eyebrow-raising decision.

Developers are also important, but less so than users. It would be nice to keep the lights on just to let people tinker, but that same openness creates security risks and costs money. Many on this site praise Apple when they make restrictive decisions that harm devs, as long as those decisions are justified in terms of end-user privacy and security.

I think the transaction volume question gets at the heart of the issue, at least for me. If there is a lot of economic activity here, that's a signal that user needs might not be accounted for in this decision, or at least are not its primary driver. On the other hand, if only $1M or $2M per year is changing hands in the affected part of the ecosystem, well . . . again, nothing lasts forever.

<comment><USER101> This is the API that Alexa integration works through, so I imagine it is a pretty large number.</comment></comment>


Don't link to line numbers in GitHub - <AUTHOR> http://andrew.yurisich.com/work/2014/07/16/dont-link-that-line-number/ <comment><USER2> ProTip: Hit the __y __key on any GitHub page with source code.

It'll instantly expand the URL to its canonical form, e.g.

[https://github.com/sass/libsass/blob/master/parser.cpp#L29-L...](https://github.com/sass/libsass/blob/master/parser.cpp#L29-L36)

to

[https://github.com/sass/libsass/blob/fca1f75a14fe5336c7b1a4b...](https://github.com/sass/libsass/blob/fca1f75a14fe5336c7b1a4b38c69bda7fece714f/parser.cpp#L29-L36)

which stays valid indefinitely (unless the commit is deleted from the repo).

P.S. Hit the __? __key for more keyboard awesomeness. :)

<comment><USER3> Yeah, that's what he said in the post.

<comment><USER4> Not what he said in the title though. Should be "don't link to non-canonical urls on github", line numbers are irrelevant.

<comment><USER5> We're meant to read more than the title nowadays?

<comment><USER6> Like the original comment, my original thought was that it was probably something to do with people referring to line numbers on HEAD. A less link- bait title that confirmed this would have allowed me to easily skip this this article which, for my purposes, was useless.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> "Don't Link that Line Number!" -> "Don't use unstable references if you need stable ones"

<comment><USER8> Yea, unnecessarily controversial title. The point is that if you want to link to some code, link to a particular version of that code, not the latest version of that code. The whole file could be deleted, let alone a change in line position.

<comment><USER9> I'm going to play the advocate of the devil here, and say that it's a _necessary_ controversial title. HN is so crowded these days that an uncontroversial title would never have gotten enough upvotes within 10 minutes to get on the front page.

<comment><USER10> I would also say "necessary" controversial title, but because as a relative newbie to GitHub I might have made this mistake without thinking about it. Now I know, whereas before I didn't; and if the title wasn't engaging/controversial enough for me to click on it, I wouldn't.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> I had the same realization a while ago, even started working on a documentation engine built around the idea that I never quite finished:

[https://github.com/32bitkid/zang](https://github.com/32bitkid/zang)

The general concept was a markdown preprocessor that would include references to commits in git repositories and expand to the referenced content.

Because all the references were bound to a commit, then a) they were stable (if you used a hash rather than brach name), but more importantly b) you could determine when the file had changed and the documentation was possibly out of date.

it would generate a warning/error and one would have to update the documentation accordingly.

Anyway nice to see other people with the same underlying idea.

</comment><comment><USER12> Or link directly to functions on Sourcegraph, if you are referring to a function and not just a line range.

Like [https://sourcegraph.com/code.google.com/p/go/.GoPackage/net/...](https://sourcegraph.com/code.google.com/p/go/.GoPackage/net/http/.def/Get).

(Full disclosure: I'm one of the creators of Sourcegraph.)

<comment><USER13> I really begin to like sourcegraph, nice job! I don't know how to ask the question without sounding too negative: any chance it might get faster? I took about 10 seconds (just a feeling, didn't measure it) to load the page.

<comment><USER12> Not too negative. We love hearing from people who use Sourcegraph. :)

Which page was it, and does it take that long every time you load that page?

We have improved average page load time a lot (it's now 200-500msec), but we're seeing a lot of variance on pages with a lot of data and when DB load spikes during backend build imports. So, just know we are working on it, and let us know about specific things that are really slow. (We track all page load timings, but we try to prioritize what matters to our users most.)

<comment><USER13> It was the page you've linked to ([https://sourcegraph.com/code.google.com/p/go/.GoPackage/net/...](https://sourcegraph.com/code.google.com/p/go/.GoPackage/net/http/.def/Get))

just now about 7 seconds (repeatable), on a faster machine it went down to 3 seconds (also repeatable) (all numbers are from me counting in my head, so this is not exact)

<comment><USER12> Hmm, interesting. I'll follow up with you by email. Thanks for reporting this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I totally agree. The problem is not links to line numbers, that I found really useful, the problem is that these links must have a commit context otherwise they become unreliable.

</comment><comment><USER15> If you use Sublime Text the Githubinator plugin provides shortcuts to create a permalink to GitHub for the current selection in your editor. I use it all the time - it's great.

[https://github.com/ehamiter/ST2-GitHubinator](https://github.com/ehamiter/ST2-GitHubinator)

</comment><comment><USER16> > Then, tap the "y" key to jump to the last commit found for that region.

That's not actually what happens. Pressing "y" resolves the current reference (master, some tag, whatever). It has nothing to do with what you select, you're just following the pointer that is the current ref.

</comment><comment><USER17> You can of course link to a line number on a specific commit. You don't need to avoid line numbers, you just need to link to a specific commit.

The y shortcut is super helpful though -- I was always trying to figure out how to get the the latest commit hash on my own before, clicking on the latest commit in history etc., very cumbersome.

This is important enough for linking to sourcecode (I agree), that I kind of wish github had an actual button for it on screen, instead of having to know the magic shortcut. But I realize github screen real estate is precious.

</comment><comment><USER18> Is there a reasonable use case for linking to line-numbers on branch/tag on github? If not, it might be good UX to remove that option. i.e. only honour such links to immutable urls.

Further, even if you're looking at a mutable reference (like master), the line number links could/should be to the underlying immutable url (based on the commit).

If there is a marginal use case for linking to line numbers of mutable refs, perhaps it should be the non-default case, discoverable by keyboard shortcut like this...

<comment><USER19> Yes, in a team working remotely it is often useful to link to a specific chunk of code during a (voice or chat) conversation. Typically you're talking about the _current_ code in a branch, and it is useful for the person clicking the link to know that we are in fact talking about HEAD and not a specific commit.

This is the equivalent of calling someone to your desk and pointing at the screen. It is fine if those links stop working a few hours later.

<comment><USER18> I think that also works if the link is actually to the immutable commit to which the branch is currently pointing?

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> This works great unless you're rebasing and the commit hash you reference falls out of use. In PR comments that I expect to rebase again before release but for which I don't expect changes earlier in the file I'm referencing, I often live on the edge and link to the mutable diff. In the context of PR comments, you can edit them after the fact, so neither choice is necessarily game over - you can fix the line number or the commit hash you point to after the fact.

<comment><USER21> You already know the answer to that problem: «Do not rebase commits that you have pushed to a public repository.» - - [[http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git- Branching-Rebasing](http://git-scm.com/book/en/Git-Branching-Rebasing)]

<comment><USER20> Trite one-liners aside, I think you'll find in practice that some good teams rebase commits on feature branches all the time in order to keep the commit history readable. The implicit contract in that case is that nobody else considers that branch to be usable until it's merged.

It all comes down to the definition of publicity. If your team considers a feature branch to be privately owned by the requestor except for the purposes of code review, it works great.

<comment><USER21> I do not mind feature branch rebasing, _when_ it does not violate the publicity rule (let's call it that). After the history is public, rewriting history is such a dangerous endeavor as to be completely inadvisable. More so, if one is actually looking at the end goal: a linear repository history. I can't even understand the need for a (fake) linear repository history.

<comment><USER17> I have come to understand the need.

If a feature branch is under development for a year, and then merged in.... you wind up with commits in master that only appeared today, but are dated (and appear in the commit history timeline) up to a year ago. It's actually a different kind of 'rewriting history', really.

This can be very confusing when trying to figure out what happened. And even worse when trying to figure out where a bug was introduced (via git bisect or manually).

Still, I, like you, try to avoid rebase history rewrites whenever possible, because they can lead to such messes. But I've come to understand why people want them, it's not just "aesthetically pleasing commit history", which sounds kind of inane I agree.

Then "only when it's not public" rule effectively means "never do it" for most people's development practices. Anything that takes longer than an hour or so for me to do is going to be in a public repo, for the 'backup' nature of making sure i don't lose it while in progress if nothing else. Anything that more than one person collaborates on (or you want code review suggestions on) obviously is going to be in a public repo. It's pretty rare feature branch work I do that never makes it into a public repo (before it's committed to master).

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I often wished that I could link to function names or so instead.

<comment><USER23> In Trac you can link to #/searchterm.

</comment></comment><comment><USER24> I've always linked to line numbers under specific commits or tags. Didn't know about the 'y' shortcut though, very helpful.

</comment><comment><USER25> That's easy to fix- link to a line in a specific commit. Assuming you never clobber the history, that link should remain constant.

</comment><comment><USER26> Anyone with minimal knowledge of github would know that the references can changes...

</comment><comment><USER27> This has nothing to do with line numbers whatsoever, it's about constructing links using whatever commit the branch is currently on rather than linking to the branch. A regular link to a file using a branch reference could just as easily disappear completely as the branch reference moves.

<comment><USER28> Please don't mention that you flagged the OP. That's against the guidelines: _If you flag something, please don 't also comment that you did._

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> Short but informative

</comment><comment><USER30> Someone just discovered space-time

</comment><comment><USER31> Why change the title to "Don't link to line numbers in GitHub", when that's not what the article is saying at all?

<comment><USER32> The original title is "Don't Link that Line Number" which also isn't what the article is saying, so the HN re-title is an improvement.

An accurate title would look more like "Use commit-specific links when linking to line numbers on Github".

<comment><USER31> The original title (as written in the article), is actually "Don't Link That Line Number!" Even without the exclamation though, I think that clueful readers would know that this choice of title is a stylistic one.

Title choice _is_ largely a matter of style. So, I guess I'm wondering why any of them need to be changed?

Furthermore, it seems to be completely arbitrary. The techcrunch article titled "#Love: Virtually No Sex" if made accurate would have been "People may be losing interest in sex". The "Simpler and faster GC for Go" would have been "Proposal for Simpler and faster GC for Go". Etc.

<comment><USER32> I agree. I misinterpreted your initial comment.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> Why would you assume that a link is good for more than 1 day ?

<comment><USER15> [http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html](http://www.w3.org/Provider/Style/URI.html)

</comment></comment><comment><USER34> Is it not possible to link to line numbers in that commit? I know you can link to specific files in the commits

<comment><USER35> It is possible, which the author points out in his article :)

<comment><USER34> Woops! My bad</comment></comment></comment>


Hacker Newsletter - <AUTHOR> http://www.hackernewsletter.com/ <comment><USER2> I love this for weeks when I'm particularly busy. But even on weeks where I check HN very day, I still go through the newsletter each weekend and re-visit the "Ask HN" and "Show HN" threads.

Thanks, Kale

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks, and actually the "Ask HN" and "Show HN" threads were the original reason behind the newsletter... since those seem to not stick around on the front page very long.

</comment></comment><comment><USER3> About time this got submitted, Kale! I'm surprised it wasn't already, even :-) Kale has been putting in some solid time on this.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks Peter! I don't know how you do two newsletters and all your great sites... these things take a good bit of time. I don't even want to keep track of how long it takes me just to click the publish button when I think I'm done. I know if there was an edit button that would reduce it for sure. :)

<comment><USER3> And I have another couple of newsletters coming out in the next few weeks too! :-) I need to write about it sometime - there are some big wins you can make by cobbling together various scripts and techniques. Need to get today's Ruby Weekly out the door now though.. ;-)

<comment><AUTHOR> Sounds good. I built a Sinatra app that helps me build out the newsletter each week. It works pretty well, but I have a lot of tweaks I want to play with. I couldn't do it without it though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> I've subcribed since the begining. I like the way the sessions are divided. I also passed the newsletter to friends I know that they would not follow HN everyday. I understand there is always some bias in any news selection but I believe Kale is doing very well!

</comment><comment><USER5> Great timesaver and a good combination of links. Thanks Bro! \-- I'll buy you a couple beers since you don't have the 'donate' button or ads yet.

</comment><comment><USER6> So many of you already knew about it, am I feeling left out :(

BTW, subscribed :)

</comment><comment><USER7> This has been a huge timesaver. I look forward to it every week, Kale. Thanks.

</comment><comment><USER8> thats great! signed up as soon as i looked at one of the previous newsletters.

</comment><comment><USER9> Awesome idea! I was hoping somebody came up with a newsletter for HN.

<comment><AUTHOR> Thanks! I've been doing it for 41 weeks now and the feedback has been great, but wanted to wait a bit till I posted it back on Hacker News.

<comment><USER10> Just wondering, do you think the general acceptance/feedback would be different if you didn't wait so long?

When I found this, I immediately appreciated it and joined. It's been wonderful.

<comment><AUTHOR> Good question. I had posted a "Tell HN" when I started it, but it just didn't get much traction. My thinking was that a lot of HN "meta" type projects die off after a month or so, and one that requires an email is even a tougher sell. So I waited and tried other things to gain traction. I had wanted to do this earlier, but wanted to get somethings in place before and just never got to it. Glad I posted it now though! I need to do some other write-ups based on what I've learned (thanks peterc for that idea) as I'm sure that will help too.

<comment><USER3> Yeah, having the "history" is a big deal. People are far more reluctant to sign up for things that look fresh out of the gate because it's an unknown quantity, there's little social proof to find, and because so many people give up on projects in the short-term.. There are some "tricks" you can employ to lower these barriers a bit but since I'm still using them, I'll have to write about them a little further down the track!

<comment><USER10> Yeah, it's tough to get traction. Especially without some kind of history. And for people who like to participate in all sorts of different fields, you constantly have to keep proving yourself.

It's too bad human psychology works that way and ideas can't be judged at face value. I'm sure there's a lot of amazing and useful ideas that just didn't have the personal history behind the implementers that failed to gain traction. HN gives me hope though, since there's a ton of smart people who are willing to give new ideas a chance.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> This is great. Can I suggest adding the vote count for articles that you're linking to? Helps me get a quick sense of just how popular something was.

</comment><comment><USER12> "-Paul Stamatiou, Co-Founder at Notifo and Blogger"

Relatively certain Paul is not a co-founder for Blogger.

<comment><AUTHOR> Yeah... that was worded wrong. Will fix, thanks.

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> A flattr button would be nice ;)

<comment><AUTHOR> Not really a fan of Flattr or donate now buttons, but I've had a lot of subscribers ask about it. I just started using some affiliated type links and would like to run ads at some point if I can keep them relevant (which I think will be easy to do). After today I'll probably have to start paying for MailChimp (which is a good problem to have), so I need to figure that out sooner than later.</comment></comment>


"Good On Video" Is The New "Good On Paper" With HireHive (YC S10) - <AUTHOR> http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/02/good-on-video-is-the-new-good-on-paper-with-ycombinators-hirehive-and-ycommonapp/

<comment> old-gregg I don't know either this is good for employers/customers but one thing for sure: this makes me feel even more terrified of failure, of becoming a "candidate" again. This company is making the world even more hostile for people who need jobs for reasons stated here by others.

Let me explain: my wife is looking for a job now. She's not an engineer so the progress has been slow: hundreds of resumes emailed, no response, constant thoughts like "something's wrong with my resume??". Now you're telling me that she needs to sit down and _film herself hundreds of times and then stare at the empty inbox and think "something's wrong with the way I look/talk?"_ That's just disgusting.

<comment><USER2> In-person interviews have an even worse problem: if your wife is rejected after one of those, she has to worry not merely that she looks lame in a video, but seems lame in person. But you don't find the concept of interviews disgusting, presumably because it is already a familiar one. Which suggests that your real problem with this technology is its novelty.

<comment><USER3> Personally, I just don't like the way I look on videos. I think it is harder to make a good impression on video. I acknowledge that I might look as weird in RL as on video, but in RL I can decide not to think about it.

Anyway, I can imagine this video thing taking off, unless there are legal problems. Don't know why, but I think in the uk you are not supposed to include photograps with applications. Perhaps to prevent racism?

<comment><USER4> Photos are probably frowned on to discourage racism, ageism and the good old fashioned "we'll only invite the pretty ones in for interview". It's also common practice to remove date of birth from CVs.

It's more a case of being considered inappropriate than legal barriers...a friend of mine recruiting abroad found the idea of attached photos nearly as amusing as the adjacent salary demands.

I think that the video thing will suffer more from being considered a bit odd or time consuming compared with skimming through text, especially for large non-creative employers looking to fill a quota. On the other hand, webcam interviews could start to replace the first-stage phone interview.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Maybe I'm just paranoid and have low expectations for humanity, but I think the main demand for video interviews would be to do racial/ethnic/attractiveness discrimination on candidates. Early in the process, it would be a lot easier to discard all people of [unfavored group] without any allegations of unfairness.

<comment><USER6> Bad discrimination will cost the company lot of money. Good discrimination will make the company lot of money.

If a company discriminate based on race, they will get the kind of performance they deserve.

<comment><USER7> I'm perplexed by your statement about there being "Good" and "Bad" discrimination. In this context, discrimination means judging someone based on their looks or other visible features from their video. If nobody believes they should be judged by whether they're male/female, minorities, religious, attractive/ugly, etc., why would there ever be "Good" discrimination?

<comment><USER5> I can think of some (admittedly contrived) scenarios where being allowed to discriminate on illegal-in-the-US traits would be beneficial to the company. For instance, I think women would be much more willing to buy undergarments from women than (especially, unattractive) men. There are definitely people with a preference about the sex of their doctor. There are lots of documented studies about attractive people being more successful in management and sales, so especially if the hire is viewed as a long-term career move, hiring an unattractive person might be objectively inferior.

There are specific, legal, questions you could ask which would be ok ("how many years of experience do you have with bras?", various technical questions, etc.) which might correlate highly with certain physical characteristics.

I think there is a moral argument against discrimination on these grounds, but there's also an argument for letting companies make their own decisions.

Even without legal prohibitions on discrimination, I wouldn't want to create a workplace where this kind of discrimination happened -- even if it were good for a specific job, it would also drive away other candidates for other jobs, and I think the net loss would be greater.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> My initial response is definitely skeptical. If I'm asked to record a video for an interview question, I'm going to write down my answer first, and then read it in a casual way.

You're going to be judging my skill at speaking into a little square at the top of a computer. I hope this isn't treated as a tool to judge interpersonal skills.

What value is added, beyond making it easier to dismiss people based on appearance and personal preferences? I guess judging based on a perceived personality is kosher, but let's be realistic about the purpose here.

I think a live video-call is totally fair-game, but something about this definitely rubs me the wrong way.

<comment><AUTHOR> I appreciate your skepticism :) We think there's actually a lot you can learn about someone by watching and listening to them speak, particularly when they're talking about what they're passionate about or why they want to work at your company.

Another advantage is that, for some people at least, it's a lot easier to just record yourself speaking for 60 seconds than to write a cover letter (which have become engineered to point of being pretty bland, IMHO).

<comment><USER9> There's also the exact opposite issue for some people. I don't really have a problem opening up or making a personal connection in person. I cringe hearing or seeing myself on video. I can't stand it, even if I'm seeing a video of my son and I playing which I love. A company requiring a video recording as part of the application process would be an instant pass for me since you wouldn't be getting me, you'd be getting the extremely uncomfortable self conscious version of me.

<comment><USER10> Ditto. This strikes me as great for extroverts and terrible for introverts.

<comment><USER11> By nature I'm somewhat of an introvert, so I have to apply a conscious effort to speak out at parties and other social events. I see this as a great excuse for myself and others like me to keep practicing and improving. The fact that your personality type is "introverted" doesn't mean you actually have to remain an introvert.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Does anyone else find the prospect of video résumé a bit frightening? Some people (myself included) are simply not that comfortable in front of a camera.

<comment><USER13> i agree the prospect of filming yourself is somewhat uncomfortable but i've been stunned during the YC application review process by just how much a video adds to the application. it's actually, for me, the most important part of the application while reviewing it.

i believe employers will realize this too and once they do, they'll insist on having video as standard in applications. once that happens, uploading videos of yourself will become more commonplace and eventually feel less alien.

<comment><USER14> _it's actually, for me, the most important part of the application while reviewing it._

why?

<comment><USER2> It is for me too, and the reason is that's it's so high bandwidth compared to text. At our stage, we care mostly about the people, and you can tell much more about people from watching them talk than from reading what they write, just as (though not to the same extent) you can tell more about someone from meeting them in person than reading a resume.

<comment><USER15> Seems like kind of a strange filter to me. What is the connection between how well someone comes across on camera and how good they are at coding and developing a product? You say it's high bandwidth, but is the data useful? 50 terabytes per second of noise is still noise.

Also, I don't think this test fares very well in retrospect. Steve Jobs probably would've given a good video resume, but what about Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg, Evan Williams, and the like? These guys usually come across as duds on video.

<comment><USER2> It sounds like what you mean by coming across well on video = being charismatic. You seem to assume that's what we're looking for, but it's not. What we're looking for is people who will make good startup founders. We have a lot of data about what good startup founders are like, so we're able to recognize them well enough to make the video useful.

<comment><USER16> Study after study shows that people consider good looking, charismatic people smarter and more trustworthy. How can you make sure you're not falling into the same trap? This seems like it will just degrade into the prettier, charismatic people getting yet another leg up on everyone else.

<comment><USER2> I could be falling into this trap to some extent, but if you think about my background, I'd probably be less likely to fall into it than just about anyone else in the world. If anything I'd worry that I'd be inclined to discriminate against attractive people, not in their favor.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER17> Great job on charging for service right out of the gate.

My assumption would be that someone with a flair for showmanship can excel at this even if they are a mediocre performer. However, I could see this being useful for real time.

</comment><comment><USER18> The skeptical comments are interesting. But it doesn't seem like they are the primary market.

At Active Interview, we've been doing video interviews for a while now. We've gotten good traction among organizations who have continuous hiring needs and/or those who need to process candidates who are geographically dispersed.

For example, One Laptop per Child used Active Interview to screen a couple hundred applicants from around the world. They used us to test:

1\. interpersonal skills & communication

2\. language proficiency

How much time/money would it cost to coordinate and phone screen everyone?

We've also gotten a lot of interest from academic organizations, who need to process applicants every semester. We've especially been working with graduate departments, like MBA programs, who have a high number of international applicants. They use us because:

1\. Time shifting - it's difficult to set up a mutual time with candidates around the world.

2\. Language - many international applicants have through the roof English scores and can write like Steinbeck, but can't speak a lick.

3\. Normalize interviews - different recruiters assess candidates with varying degrees of leniency. Active Interview lets the entire recruiting team view, score and comment on every candidate response. The scores are tallied and averaged.

4\. Most candidates like taking a video interview over writing yet another essay.

I understand why some may be skeptical, but there's definitely a need for video interviewing for some types of organizations and I'm glad Hirehive is getting some publicity for all of us in this area.

<comment><USER5> I see the value for some jobs, but audio seems like it is just as good as video, much cheaper, less intrusive, and vastly more accessible.

<comment><USER18> This is almost a thing you have to see to believe. Video just gives you so much more resolution and insight. Social science studies have told us many times that 90% of communication is non-verbal - audio only captures that 10%.

Of course, nothing beats face to face, but it also comes at a cost (time, money). We built Active Interview to help those who need to quickly process a large number of applicants at as high of a resolution as possible.

<comment><USER4> Out of curiosity as much as anything else since you've quite possibly done the research, how much of that 90% of communication is reciprocal (body language towards interviewer, instinctive reaction to questions)?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> I think realtime interaction is the key element missing from most early-stage screenings, not video. I'd rather have an IM/irc/voice chat with someone, propose problems, and observe how he tries to solve the problem, than canned and rehearsed video clips. The only job for which I'd consider a canned video clip to be really useful is a job which requires producing canned video clips.

<comment><USER18> I don't think anything is stopping you from using IM/irc/chat. The problem that video screenings solve isn't one that you face.

For example, Thunderbird School of Global Management, a top international MBA program, is planning on using Active Interview as part of their admissions process. They're letting applicants answer a video questionnaire to replace 1 of 3 essays. It's purely optional. They have a full admission team of 10+ people, working full time traveling around the world screening applicants. Using a tool like AI saves tons of time and money in the early screening stages. Unless you are a organization like that, you won't truly feel the pain that Active Interview or Hirehive solves.

</comment></comment><comment><USER19> The idea is scary at first. But really makes sense once you think about it. I agree, it makes the screening process more human.

I know the job market is not good right now for job seekers to be chosers, but if I have to apply with a video, I would feel more up to it if I see the hiring team's or manager's video too.

</comment><comment><USER20> "the higher bandwidth of video provides more information than text, which results in better informed hiring decisions"

Not sure about this. Generally, I'm uncomfortable with all the room for discrimination that something like video brings into play -- even if it isn't intentional.

See the case of orchestra auditions where female players did tremendously better when judged from behind a screen, gender being removed from the equation. Even if people feel unbiased about a lot of roles, they might still have them play out... ???

That, and I just think so many video things like this end up gimmicky. I can see it well applied, and also easily misused.

</comment><comment><USER21> This is actually a terrific idea... for applicants who are good on camera.

I instantly get deer-in-headlightsy and stiff when the camera starts rolling, so a potential employer wouldn't get an accurate read on me.

<comment><AUTHOR> Can you think of anything that would help you relax so you could be your true self?

<comment><USER22> i sincerely hope your startup fails. i simply do not want to live in a world in which an expectation of passively recorded videos "scales".

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I think most candidates who are good will find this to be way too much work to prove their point. They won't do it. Secondly, depending on the job a lot of people may get disqualified just because they seem lame on video, though they are stellar at what they do.

But as an idea, I like it for its novelty. The jobs space is broken in many ways and this is worth a shot. Just don't think it will work for every job type. For hiring at Crate & Barrel or Starbucks perhaps.

</comment><comment><USER24> There is a startup called SayHired.com that does something similar but just audio. They found a niche with call center agents.

I'm not entirely sold yet that this is good for hiring developers since some of us are probably not comfortable talking on video.

Maybe the niche for this service is for hiring receptionists or sales/marketing people.

<comment><AUTHOR> We're still figuring out the full range of positions HireHive works best for. We agree that receptionists, sales/marketing people, customer service, etc are good fits for the service and have had positive feedback from them so far.

Thanks for the pointer to SayHired!

</comment></comment><comment><USER25> I'd love to hear jl's take on this since she's YC's character appraisal specialist. Do these videos help her with that?

</comment><comment><USER26> So it's not enough that I spend hours working and tailoring my CV and cover letter for every job application and hours more writing answers to selection critera.

Now you want me to record and produce a video selling myself? Hah! Good luck with that.

</comment><comment><USER27> I wonder how many of these comments are based on experience hiring. The challenge isn't from the applicant's standpoint but from the other end. Certainly video can be used for discrimination. But that is absolutely not the only use case.

<comment><USER5> I have hired for or at 5 companies so far.

I've never used video, and I have hired people based solely on phone conversations, or IRC conversations -- but usually phone/irc followed by an in-person interview.

I can't think of any value of recorded video over realtime chat for anything except "create a video clip for me!" For a sales job involving in-person meetings with clients, a realtime video chat might be a bit better than realtime audio, but the difference is much less than the value of an in-person meeting.

For a developer job, I would consider this totally without value. "IM presence" and "how well can he explain something in words" (voice or text) would be worth vastly more, and "sit next to me and do this task and explain it to me" would be the ultimate test.

<comment><AUTHOR> The response we've heard so far is that companies have found the videos to be quite helpful. We don't see them as a replacement for the entire hiring process, and certainly for hiring developers it's still important to do in- person interviews, have them write code (which they can also do using HireHive, since we support multiple types of responses, not just videos), etc.

<comment><USER5> If you could be a framework for any kind of question/response (and I think timed and interactive would be a plus), that would be great. If you could then make the "grading and evaluation" workflow on the employer side support routing through subject matter experts, a prospective team, manager, etc., based on either employer-specified rules, or some kind of policies which you suggest and which can be tweaked, I would probably use this, even without ever using the video portion.

<comment><AUTHOR> We support questions with a few different types of answers (video, short, medium and long text responses, file uploads).

We're working on the grading/evaluation features on the employer-side right now. This is something we're excited about, because it allows for more people to give input in the hiring process and opens up the possibility for coordination among companies as we're doing with the YCommonApp.

Always happy to hear what real people find useful :) Feel free to email me (nick [at] hirehive.com) if have you any other suggestions or questions if you try out the service.

<comment><USER5> Time limits per question or per questionnaire would be useful. There are really two reasons: 1) Intelligence (and often job performance) is measured by how fast a problem can be solved. Within limits, it doesn't matter, and often a better solution that takes slightly longer to come up with is better overall. However, for a problem which is bounded in difficulty (such that a normal job applicant willing to put 2 hours into the interview could answer everything), being able to solve the problem in 24h vs. 2h is not really a good thing.

2) It's a lot harder to "cheat" on a realtime exam, especially on video. The purpose of the interview is to evaluate a candidate, and it's unlikely that candidate's much smarter (or paid) friend would be part of the long-term package, but it's entirely possible someone could be getting assistance during the interview. (it's basically like when a law or consulting firm sends a partner to win the business, and then has summer associates doing the actual work once they're engaged...)

Assuming remote-interview-only, this would be a problem. Also, I view in- person interviews as fundamentally somewhat random. If you really like a candidate on paper (or on video), and he shows up and is close but not necessarily 100%, a lot of interviewers are willing to explain away problems as "he was nervous" or "having a bad day". Once an interviewer emotionally bonds with a candidate, it's a lot harder to be objective -- this is why I like to do early-stage objective/automatic screenings to determine basic competence.

<comment><AUTHOR> All good feedback. We've got time limits per questionnaire already, and I'll add per-question limits to the list of feature requests.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER28> I was considering a startup along exactly these lines within the last couple of weeks, but for college applicants. I ended up not going forward as I wasn't personally super interested, and the friend who had the original idea said there appeared to be a patent covering it.

</comment><comment><USER29> The idea is actually a good one, but there is much talk of "killing" Monster.com - what's to stop Monster.com from developing a similar scheme and piloting it to its massive user base as soon as this idea catches on?

<comment><AUTHOR> This is the problem every startup faces when going against established competitors. We have to compete by focusing, working fast, and always doing right by our users and customers :)

<comment><USER30> _This is the problem every startup faces when going against established competitors._

Only if the technology is trivial

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER31> So it's a nock off of chatroulette with a business spin? How long will it take until The Gap sees that 90% of their video applicants are actually dudes wanking off?</comment>